What AMD Processor will convert faster

[Andy149]

I wondering what processor i shoudl go for, (considdering that i want the best tmpgenc rate possible) I an an AVID AMD suupporter so no commenbts about p4 ht etc.....

AMD XP 2600+
Barton 2500
I have upto £100

[ryanreko]

wow got me but i would like to know as well

bump!

[ZippyP.]

Just get the fastest AMD processor that you can for your money. Here's a chart: http://www17.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030217/cpu_charts-26.html

The 2500 Barton is not on the chart but the 2600 has to be faster if you extrapolate.

BTW, AMD is faster for the $ (or for the Pound as well).

[freak_in_cage_10k]

well, obviously the 2600+ is faster, but it is also more expensive.

also, the newer 2500+ barton processors are HIGHLY overclockable!! It runs at 1.8 GHz default right? well, with no increase in CPU voltage (therefore v little increase in heat output & no damage to cpu) i increased the speed to 2.25GHz!! Speed for free!!! All i did was increase the multiplier, i didn;t touch the fsb, and i dont have super cooling or n e thing!!!! So, if you want to try sum no risk overclocking then get the 2500+, if you want the SLIGHTLY faster one then get the 2600+ although it is a little bit more expensive.

personally i wuld go for the barton

[WeedVender]

why not go with the new opteron chip. Im using it in colaboration with Windows 2003 (student edition) and encodes are super fast. Only prob is that opteron is SMP only i think.

[Andy149]

Huummmm optron wouldnt life be nice with one of those!, i would have to buy a new mobo because the nforce 2 doesnt support it and the chips are WAY in excess of £100! if they are avaiable

think optron is out of question...... what socket is the hammer going to be?

[txpharoah]

Just know that your AMD will ALWAYS be slower than a P4 on video due to the SSE and SSE2. The MMX/MMX2 and 3Dnow stuff cannot compete at the video level. That's just the raw truth about it. If you spend a ton of money on the newest and fastest, you may not notice much, but if you spent the same on the newest Intel, you'd be better off if video is your PRIMARY goal. If you do other stuff, maybe AMD would be best, it just depends on how you plan to use your system. Also know that the AMD processors DO NOT HAVE FAILSAFES and will MELT DOWN if they are overheated, and an Intel P4 will not because it DOES have failsafes to slow down the chips. I've had than run-in several times on melted AMD processors. The P4 systems would lock up a bit or slow down, allowing us to shut them down for cool-off time. The AMD gave no such warning... just popping out or failing to restart ever again.

Some of that Tom's Hardware analysis doesn't add up. No way in hell those are accurate facts. I'd love to hear more on that test. I'd hire him in if he could make my AMD setups operate better than the P4 ones. Fat chance, though. I've got both AMD and P4 systems at home and work, and by no means will the AMD systems operate as well as the P4, and that's with the EXACT SAME hardware and software configuration. The only differences maybe being in the MoBo, CPU, and maybe RAM from system to system.

[WeedVender]

whatever ur name is...

I think that they changed that...
That AMD chips melt. I remember a special stated that they had palimino cores and the melted. true, horrible sight but since barton ive heard they changed that.

Also A dual AMD Opteron set up running at 1.4 ghz beats out a 3.06 P4 Xeon. Ive seen that on Tom Hardware.com but im not sure if ur going to trust that info...

[LanEvo7]

Currently your best bet would be a Intel 3.06 800fsb with the new canterwood motherboard. If you want AMD, the barton 3000+ is the best at encoding out of all the AMD chips.

Also know that the AMD processors DO NOT HAVE FAILSAFES and will MELT DOWN if they are overheated, and an Intel P4 will not because it DOES have failsafes to slow down the chips. I've had than run-in several times on melted AMD processors. The P4 systems would lock up a bit or slow down, allowing us to shut them down for cool-off time. The AMD gave no such warning... just popping out or failing to restart ever again.

You really should really do some research before making such ignorant statements. ALL current Athlon XP processor chips have a system that works with all current Nforce2, KT400, and KT400A motherboards that give you a warning and/or shuts down the computer if your cpu reaches a certain temperature. They also have a very low heat dissapation. Current thoroughbred B are some of the most overclockable cpus. Of course you probably deny this...

[txpharoah]

You really should really do some research before making such ignorant statements. ALL current Athlon XP processor chips have a system that works with all current Nforce2, KT400, and KT400A motherboards that give you a warning and/or shuts down the computer if your cpu reaches a certain temperature. They also have a very low heat dissapation. Current thoroughbred B are some of the most overclockable cpus. Of course you probably deny this...

Well, that's fine. But many AMD chips from 2001 and 2002 in my home, my office, and at a friend's house have melted. If new ones fixed that, then great, but as of March 2003, I was still being told that the chips would melt. If being 2-3 months outdated is "ignorance" then fine, I'm ignorant, but 24 months worth of melting hasn't shown AMD to be a good product, especially when it encodes slower, both with video AND audio.

The only Intel errors I've seen were with the ORIGINAL 2.0 processor. It was just bad, and quickly replaced. I know two people that got them and had to replace them with newer chips within 6 months, but not because of melting or anything, just from odd performance. Reviews I read on those chips were not kind.

And Tom's Hardware is nice and all, but not as much of a controlled environment as it should be. Great for general advice, but the tests are not usually REAL-WORLD and you should never go off of one reviewer alone. Look at some of the stuff on Tech TV and a few other magazine like PC World. The most reliable reviewers work for places that make profit (magazines, tv shows, etc).

[GreyDeath]

TXPharoah,

I've been running an AMD 2100 for about 8 months now. It runs according to the mobo software monitor around 60c and 72c when it's encoding. Just the other week I went to put more ram in and accidentally loosened the power cord to the cpu fan. The mobo bios shut it down by itself. It happened twice before I figured what went wrong. Still working beautifully.

I guess what I'm trying to get at is that most systems don't rely on just one part to monitor itself. My mobo has the cpu temp in the bios, and Asus even supplied monitoring software for Windows.

[Nelson37]

As I understand it, the current AMD meltdown protection depends on corresponding motherboard support, while Intel's is built-in to the chip.
Getting somebody else to handle it is not the same thing, and is much less dependable.

Having said that, I prefer the price/performance ratio for AMD over Intel.

[soundforbjt]

Having had both an XP 2400+ T-Bred "B" and a N-Force board with 512 mb pc 2700 ram and my current P4 2.4 B and the same ram, I can safely say this.....The Intel encodes and processes video much faster...Though it is slower in gaming than the AMD XP 2400+. If you game more...get a AMD...If you do video encoding....go with Intel.

[edplayer]

Just know that your AMD will ALWAYS be slower than a P4 on video due to the SSE and SSE2. The MMX/MMX2 and 3Dnow stuff cannot compete at the video level.

All Athlon XP cpus have SSE.

[LanEvo7]

Well, that's fine. But many AMD chips from 2001 and 2002 in my home, my office, and at a friend's house have melted. If new ones fixed that, then great, but as of March 2003, I was still being told that the chips would melt. If being 2-3 months outdated is "ignorance" then fine, I'm ignorant, but 24 months worth of melting hasn't shown AMD to be a good product, especially when it encodes slower, both with video AND audio.

The only Intel errors I've seen were with the ORIGINAL 2.0 processor. It was just bad, and quickly replaced. I know two people that got them and had to replace them with newer chips within 6 months, but not because of Ymelting or anything, just from odd performance. Reviews I read on those chips were not kind.

And Tom's Hardware is nice and all, but not as much of a controlled environment as it should be. Great for general advice, but the tests are not usually REAL-WORLD and you should never go off of one reviewer alone. Look at some of the stuff on Tech TV and a few other magazine like PC World. The most reliable reviewers work for places that make profit (magazines, tv shows, etc).

The computer cafe i go has about half their computers using Thunderbirds (2nd generation Athlons, really hot) and I have yet to seen one melt yet. There are plenty of people that post on this board that have AMDs and none of them melted. If it is true that you've had that many chips melted on you, you probably didn't install it correctly. You really shouldn't blame the Chip manufacturer for your incompetence.

Like I said before, do some research before ranting. I didn't look at tomshardware for those stats. It wouldn't matter if I did anyway since they all use almost the same suite of Benchmarking programs. Its usually a set of synthetic benchmarks that usually consists of 3D Mark 2001 SE, SysMark2002, PC Mark2002, SiSoft Sandra 2003. Then it runs gaming bechmarks of using Quake III and Unreal Tornament. Hmm, they are all the same set of benchmarks, how is it that its more "controlled?"

PC World, Tech TV, and the like are not good sources for reviews. Tech TV and PC World are aimed at SOHO computer users. They review pre-built computers that come from dell, gateway, etc. These non profits are where enthusiastics can squeeze the most out of their computer. They always get the news on the newest and best stuff around. Their benchmarks are also more in depth since they USE REAL PROGRAMS, run a process and time how long it takes for the computer to complete the task. PC World, Tech TV, etc usually use Synthetic benchmarks which sometimes does not show real world performance. And its very easy to trick a Synthetic benchmark to show higher numbers. Tech TV doesn't even show any graphs or benchs, they usually just give some vague review on a computer, like Pros: fast. What the fast mean? Also if you look at their review for the Athlon 3200 they provide a link to TomsHardware, Anandtech, and these sites, but I guess these sites don't show real world performance.

[edplayer]

I think a good question for the original poster to ask would have been... "does the extra 256KB of L2 cache help more than the extra megahertz of the 2600+ in TMPGenc"

[edplayer]

If it is true that you've had that many chips melted on you, you probably didn't install it correctly. You really shouldn't blame the Chip manufacturer for your incompetence.

somewhat harsh, but basically correct

[gmatov]

Somewhat harsh, yes, but I don't think so correct. It is not easy to install a CPU incorrectly. They go in one way only. They are in ZIF sockets. It is possible to crack and ruin one if you screw up fan/heatsink install, and if you don't use some form of heat conductive paste, it WILL overheat, unless you use a "boxed" AMD with the AMD approved cooler, which has a conductive tape attached. I personally only buy AMD and only buy "boxed" versions. Cost is 10 to 20 bucks more, but cooler is included, so cost breaks even..

I think Freak should check his sources a little better. It has been a while since I o'clocked, but when I did, the advice was to bump the voltage in increments, as you bumped the core or FSB, or multiplier. You made MORE heat if you didn't. Same as running a power tool at the end of a 100 foot extension. 115 volts, static, no load, 95 volts when you run the drill, whatever. The drill burns up.
You set voltage to, say 1.65, for rated speed, bump to 20 % higher, electrons move faster, voltage drops, heat builds up, and you say it runs cool as a cucumber. I am, shall we say, skeptical.
Also, many boards do not have a thermistor sensitive enough or responsive enough to shut down the system in time. The numbers I read were 1 degree per second, and a CPU would heat up to 150C or more in a matter of just a few seconds. You have to heat the ceramic package of the CPUs heart and transfer the heat thru the little plastic sleeve on the thermistor, and interpret the temp, and then decide it's too hot, we'd best shut down.
AND, contrary to your statement that ALL the latest AMDs have thermal protection built-in, I just copied the following from the AMD site:
WARNING: Any attempt to operate the AMD Opteron™ processor without a suitable cooling solution will result in permanent damage to the processor and potentially other components within the system
I think that should settle whether there is thermal protection built into ANY AMD processor
Don't get me wrong. I use only AMDs. I like 'em. They really might not be the fastest, but, hey, so what?
There IS a lot of misinfo on any board. Generally speaking, this is not a bunch of "pros" having a think session.

[gmatov]

Well, now I know how to BOLD a quote. It is the quote beginning with WARNING. I'll try to remember that.

[NightWing]

AMD system that had the cooling go mad I have seen in the last few years will and do shut down. Not slow the clock but physicaly kill before thing go bad. Let thing cool down, solve problem and restart. Two items I never cheep on is more than enough coling or the correct level power supply for either Intel or AMD systems I setup for clients.

Rather have Intel but some times cost is a factor.

Here is an alternative. Why not do a simple render farm. Go for two cheep AMD systems and split the work. Do that with the multi system here. And some are old Intel systems.

Good luck on your hunt!

[txpharoah]

If it is true that you've had that many chips melted on you, you probably didn't install it correctly. You really shouldn't blame the Chip manufacturer for your incompetence.

somewhat harsh, but basically correct

I've personally worked with PCs since the 1980s, and the machines at work are installed by certified technicians that make more than you or I put together (some of them command more than $125 per hour). If I was so incompetent, all my systems would melt. But that is not the case. It is AMD systems from 2001 and 2002, and that's all there is to it. All of the systems I am using are AMD Athlon 2400 XP+ systems or lower. I don't see the newer ones making a big change when tech support was pretty uncaring about it's past products.

Intel is NOT licensing out it's SSE2 technology. AMD processors do not have SSE2. All they have is 3Dnow and MMX and maybe SSE, which is decent, but not as good as the P4's SSE2. This is a page I was referred to a while back by an engineering friend in Korea. Supposely, this was a very good study made readable for the layman: http://aeroguy.snu.ac.kr/lab/research_nrl_streamming.htm Also give http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/prescott-sse.html a good read on who has which instructions and which ones work better at which times.

If nobody here believes me, fine. I really don't care what you buy. I don't work for Intel or AMD, and your work will not affect mine. But in good faith, I cannot possibly support an AMD product, and in fact, their products have been so disappointing in the past, that I feel obligated to post my experiences here. If price and other reasons are why you want AMD, then go for it, but I'm warning you of possible consequences that may arise from using their products at the level of video creation or any sort of professional use. Home users generally don't do enough to overheat a system, and that is why AMD sells mostly to the home market.

And thanks, gmatov, for finding that little nugget from the AMD site. That goes along with what I had heard just a few months ago: AMD still doesn't provide protection for it's CPUs, relying on third-party boards. And my friend that had a melted AMD was using a board that was supposed to shutdown on overheat, but it was not fast enough before the CPU pooped out for good. My home systems and work systems came assembled, and for the price paid, surely came with proper boards. I pick the CPU and RAM I want, and let the vendor select a good, appropriate motherboard for me. Prices are no object when I buy good equipment. I only have one system that I built piece-by-piece on a budget, and it was an Intel P4 1.7 that works great for the measly $600 I built it with (backup system only).

Again, I still own an AMD. It's great for general home use, games, and other things, albeit a bit noiser than an Intel (this has always been the case with any AMD I've used in the past 7 years, and I still wonder why). My laptops are AMD (and my first one in 1998 melted down too after 5 days of minimal usage - my first bad AMD experience). But they have issues, and one as serious as this should be made public when discussions of VIDEO start up. I'd never run video on my AMD systems again. It cannot handle a BIG PROJECT without fizzling out. Little things, it can still do, but not hour-on-hour encodes with day-to-day heavy usage. These just can't cut it. So use them for what they are worth, and quit trying to force them.

If you want to do a bunch of video encoding, go buy an Intel.

[rwarren]

Well, that's fine. But many AMD chips from 2001 and 2002 in my home, my office, and at a friend's house have melted. If new ones fixed that, then great, but as of March 2003, I was still being told that the chips would melt. If being 2-3 months outdated is "ignorance" then fine, I'm ignorant, but 24 months worth of melting hasn't shown AMD to be a good product, especially when it encodes slower, both with video AND audio.

OK, I will be the one to ask the dumb question. If the AMD chips are such crap, melt and are so poor at encoding video, why do you have so many of them in your home, office, etc.? I would think you would have P4s all over the place due to the professional video work you are always bragging about.

Personally, I have been running AMD processors for years and I believe they consistently give you more power for price. I have a 1.4GHz Thunderbird at work and used an 700MHz Duron overclocked to 1.0GHz at home for over two years. Both machines are rock solid not "melt downs" even when overclocking. I recently replaced the Duron with a 2000+, not because there was something wrong with it, just the price was so good on the 2000+.

Richard

[rwarren]

By the way, from AMD's site

3DNow!™ Professional technology for leading-edge 3D operation

52 SSE instructions with SIMD integer and floating point additions offer excellent compatibility with Intel’s SSE technology

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_3734_3738,00.html

[LanEvo7]

Somewhat harsh, yes, but I don't think so correct. It is not easy to install a CPU incorrectly. They go in one way only. They are in ZIF sockets. It is possible to crack and ruin one if you screw up fan/heatsink install, and if you don't use some form of heat conductive paste, it WILL overheat, unless you use a "boxed" AMD with the AMD approved cooler, which has a conductive tape attached. I personally only buy AMD and only buy "boxed" versions. Cost is 10 to 20 bucks more, but cooler is included, so cost breaks even..

I don't understand what you mean. You said "its not easy to install a CPU incorrectly." Do you mean its easy or not? Well anyway it doesn't matter. I never said you shouldn't be careful when you are installing a CPU, I said its a simple process. Yes, AMD CPU's are more fragile than Intel's but all that means is you have to handle it a bit more carefully when you are installing it. Plus the fact that he said SEVERAL CPUS melted. I'd admit incompetent is somewhat harsh, but first time you screw up, thats ok. Be careful the second. If you can't do it the second, then pay a pro to do it. Don't do it yourself, something goes wrong, blame the manufacturer. Obviously the chips aren't faulty because there are so many people that use them without any issues other than the ones associated with all computers. I just didn't like the fact that he is spreading ignorant information to other members just because for whatever reason he didn't get his to work. AMD/INTEL both makes quality cpus.

AND, contrary to your statement that ALL the latest AMDs have thermal protection built-in

Please read more carefully. I said AMD XP since they don't have any white papers for the Opteron yet, i won't make any statements about that. Regarding the thermal protection built in, I said it has a system. On ALL Athlon XPs there is a thermal diode built into them. All newer motherboards can sense the diode and you can actually go into the bios to set what temperature you want the computer to reach before it shuts down. That is the system that was implemented because of some people's Thunderbirds burning out. It works similar to Intel's protection method, but the difference is Intel has everything built into the CPU, while AMD has some of the work being done by the motherboard.

WARNING: Any attempt to operate the AMD Opteron™ processor without a suitable cooling solution will result in permanent damage to the processor and potentially other components within the system

All processors have that guideline, whether AMD OR INTEL. Go ahead and try to run a P4 without a heatsink. This line is straight off Intel's website
"Failure to use a fan heatsink and a chassis with appropriate airflow may result in reduced performance or, in some instances, damage to the motherboard. "

[LanEvo7]

Intel is NOT licensing out it's SSE2 technology. AMD processors do not have SSE2.

WRONG again! Would you stop making such ignorant comments without any research.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8796_8799,00.html

Click the above link and tell me what it says for SIMD Instruction Set Support. HMMM, SSE2.
Athlon XP do not have SSE2 support, newer Athlon Opteron's do.

[txpharoah]

Well, that's fine. But many AMD chips from 2001 and 2002 in my home, my office, and at a friend's house have melted. If new ones fixed that, then great, but as of March 2003, I was still being told that the chips would melt. If being 2-3 months outdated is "ignorance" then fine, I'm ignorant, but 24 months worth of melting hasn't shown AMD to be a good product, especially when it encodes slower, both with video AND audio.

OK, I will be the one to ask the dumb question. If the AMD chips are such crap, melt and are so poor at encoding video, why do you have so many of them in your home, office, etc.? I would think you would have P4s all over the place due to the professional video work you are always bragging about.

Personally, I have been running AMD processors for years and I believe they consistently give you more power for price. I have a 1.4GHz Thunderbird at work and used an 700MHz Duron overclocked to 1.0GHz at home for over two years. Both machines are rock solid not "melt downs" even when overclocking. I recently replaced the Duron with a 2000+, not because there was something wrong with it, just the price was so good on the 2000+.

Richard

No, not dumb at all.

Office politics on the office standpoint (and an expansion in the department in late 2001 and throughout 2002 led to higher need in systems, however we had to salvage from other places in the company and transfer computers from other sectors rather than buy new ones). It has been a down market for a few years now, so new spending is capped from time to time. However, as the AMD ones poop out, Intel P4 are becoming the replacements. Why did we even start to buy AMD elsewhere in the company? I asked that myself. The answer: "Well, we sometimes fall for marketing info and learn the hard way that those with better deals and louder mouths aren't always the best ones to go with."

At home? Domestic politics. That system is for games and kids and the wife, not something I spend much time on except when I bloat my personal computers with video work. I ran video on the first AMD for a week with nonstop projects to get ahead, and all that I ended up doing was losing a system for a few weeks while it was replaced under the warranty.

I was able to overclock AMD system back in the P1 and P2 days, but in recent years, overclocking has yielded too many problems. When I left the office Friday afternoon, I left a project rendering. Given the power supply systems for power backup and the P4 and the system I have, I have no doubts I can walk in there tomorrow morning and save it, hit reset and begin the coming week's work. When I leave home tomorrow, I've got a freelance project that will render while at work. When I come home, I'll start something else until late night, then another. I can use this system. On an AMD, it couldn't put up with the stress, especially overclocked. These P4 machines are workhorses, so much so, that I was SURPRISED at the amount of work I could get out of them.

It was my mistake on the AMD does not have SSE. Apparently NOW it does, but it still doesn't have SSE2, and that is what give the P4 its advantage on video work.

And, I never brag about my work. It's professional, that's all I say. I'd be dropping names and showing clips if I were to brag, but again, I'm bound by laws on many of them to not show what I do (I'd be sued, easily). SO I don't. I have qualifications, so give what I say some consideration, though feel free to ignore me - either way, doesn't bother me. I've said me piece on AMD for now.

Good? Yes.
On video? Hell no.

FYI: I'm using the AMD to type on. It's great for this, checking email, and maybe a card game real quick. The P4 is doing the real work right now.

[bigmicka]

as a discussion of instruction sets seems to be brought up regularly. here is a link to the Opteron Data sheet Pdf.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/white_papers_and_tech_docs/23932.pdf

i was very intersted at the top to were it says "including support for SSE, SSE2, MMX" if they are being trademarked by Intel and they arent selling off the technology, Intel would be on AMD like white on rice over the use of there instruction set.

so to whoever it was at the top of this post who said encoding times rocked on the opteron, its probably because its using the SSE2 enhancements.

id like to check one of those out myself one day.

mic

[txpharoah]

WRONG again! Would you stop making such ignorant comments without any research.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8796_8799,00.html
Click the above link and tell me what it says for SIMD Instruction Set Support. HMMM, SSE2.
Athlon XP do not have SSE2 support, newer Athlon Opteron's do.

Last I checked, we were talking about Athlons. Again, I don't make a habit to check out the newest PC specs. Only when I buy them. In March 2003, vendors were still saying NO AMD had SSE2. If the Opteron does, great, about time the caught up. Spend all your money on the Opteron. But I think you should note that the Opteron is a 64-bit processor, and only runs 64-bit systems like UNIX and its flavors. They don't run Windows or anything that any consumer would normally buy (which are the primary audience on this board). So for this post, given the discussion, I'd say nice job for pointing out my mistake, but your fact doesn't help much. SSE2 or no Windows? Or get an Intel and get both. Unless you want to shell out money for the Windows Server 2003 software, which like other admin-style Windows systems in the past, probably WILL NOT support your software.

The 64-bit system looks nice and all, but for PC platforms, its still too far into the test phases for reliable use. Read the post that started this thing. He was asking about the AMD+ processors, and now you're jumping all over server platforms. The guy/gal wanted advice on home-use AMD systems, at least as I read it, so my advice was to stay towards the P4 for home video use. If ya'll want to get all pro on me, then to hell with them both. Go spend cash on an SGI.

[LanEvo7]

Last I checked, we were talking about Athlons. Again, I don't make a habit to check out the newest PC specs. Only when I buy them. In March 2003, vendors were still saying NO AMD had SSE2. If the Opteron does, great, about time the caught up. Spend all your money on the Opteron. But I think you should note that the Opteron is a 64-bit processor, and only runs 64-bit systems like UNIX and its flavors. They don't run Windows or anything that any consumer would normally buy (which are the primary audience on this board). So for this post, given the discussion, I'd say nice job for pointing out my mistake, but your fact doesn't help much. SSE2 or no Windows? Or get an Intel and get both. Unless you want to shell out money for the Windows Server 2003 software, which like other admin-style Windows systems in the past, probably WILL NOT support your software.

God you are ignorant. READ what kind of processor it is before pointing out my "mistake". First of all you said AMD, AMD includes the opteron, and soon they will be releasing a chip called the Athlon 64, another x86-64
processor.

An x86-64 is a 64bit processor that CAN RUN 32bit code also. It is NOT an exclusive 64bit processor like the PowerPCs on the Macs. So you CAN run current 32bit software using the Opteron. So you CAN run Windows XP, UT2K, encode DivX, etc.

[txpharoah]

God you are ignorant. READ what kind of processor it is before pointing out my "mistake". First of all you said AMD, AMD includes the opteron, and soon they will be releasing a chip called the Athlon 64, another x86-64 processor. An x86-64 is a 64bit processor that CAN RUN 32bit code also. It is NOT an exclusive 64bit processor like the PowerPCs on the Macs. So you CAN run current 32bit software using the Opteron. So you CAN run Windows XP, UT2K, encode DivX, etc.

Not ignorant, just a few months outdated. So I was wrong about the Opteron. Okay, that's fine. I'm not a tech, and I don't read up on computers every month. I was just posting my experience, and then my knowledge up to March 2003 when the last AMD system failed on me.

But now the Opteron is more expensive than a P4, so there goes the "AMD gives more bang for the buck" ideology. And you can buy cheaper/older-model P4 systems at discount prices and still have SSE2 while cheaper/older-model AMD systems will not.

And I'm also curious about the ability for 32-bit application to fully use the functions of the processor. Does it have access to SSE2 in 32-bit mode? I'd love to read up more on it, but that's the kind of question I want to pose to the person considering that CPU. And how is it's melt-down safety checks, if any? Since I'm not buying one, I'm not going to read the many pages to answer those questions: that's for a buyer to do.

My knowledge here has clearly run out on this topic, so it's time to go. The tech has changed a bit since I last looked, but I still had lots of issues in the past 2 years, as described above, so just be sure to check into them on future purchases. I'd still say P4 any day of the week. And I hate Intel as a company, just a sucker for their proven track record on reliable products.